Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Notice varied and upheld5 March 20253351139

Land South of Brimpton Lane and West of Blacknest Lane, Brimpton Common, Reading, RG7 4RS

Planning appeal 3351139 at Land South of Brimpton Lane and West of Blacknest Lane, Brimpton Common, Reading, RG7 4RS (West Berkshire District Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 5 March 2025 by Inspector McGlone A, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the appeal site is a suitable location for the proposed development, including whether occupants would have adequate access to facilities and services, having regard to local and national policies.

the change of use of the land to a residential site for occupation by Gypsies and Travellers, including the siting of 1 mobile home and 1 touring caravan plus 1 dayroom

Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
caravan-gypsy · Change of use
Inspector
McGlone A
Postcode
RG7 4RS

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the appeal site is a suitable location for the proposed development, including whether occupants would have adequate access to facilities and services, having regard to local and national policies
  • The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area
  • Whether the proposal would ensure public safety, having regard to the Atomic Weapons Establishment site at Aldermaston (AWE A)
  • The proposal's effect on ecology, including biodiversity net gain
  • The proposal's effect on green infrastructure
  • The proposal's effect on the Grade II listed building at Lane End Cottage and the Scheduled Monument of Bell Barrow
  • Whether there are material considerations which exist that outweigh any conflicts with the Development Plan and any other identified harm resulting from the appeal proposal: (a) need and supply, (b) alternatives, (c) personal circumstances, (d) intentional unauthorised development, (e) precedent, (f) anything else

What decided it

The cumulative and mutually reinforcing harms - particularly the substantial public safety harm near AWE Aldermaston combined with unsuitable location, character/appearance harm, and precedent/intentional unauthorised development - outweighed the benefits of pitch provision and the family's personal circumstances.

The identified harms (unsuitable location, significant harm to character and appearance, substantial harm to public safety, and significant harm to ecology and green infrastructure), reinforced by the negative weight of precedent and intentional unauthorised development, were found to outweigh the moderate benefit of pitch provision and the significant weight attached to personal circumstances and the children's best interests, both on a permanent and temporary basis.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Core Strategy Policy ADDP1Core Strategy Policy CS 7Core Strategy Policy CS 8Core Strategy Policy CS 13Core Strategy Policy CS 14Core Strategy Policy CS 17Core Strategy Policy CS 18Core Strategy Policy CS 19DPD Policy TS 3DPD Policy C1Emerging Plan Policy SP4Emerging Plan Policy DM20emerging Policy D1
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 11Paragraph 102Paragraph 110Paragraph 115Paragraph 135Paragraph 187Paragraph 198Paragraph 200Paragraph 207Paragraph 218

How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.

See how each was applied

The decision letter

Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

19 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in West Berkshire

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025

  1. Dismissed16 June 20266005143
    Field to the West of Wantage Road South of Access to Trimbledown Farm, Wantage Rd, Great Shefford, RG17 7DQ
  2. Notice varied and upheld22 August 20253363100
    Land Adjoining ‘Sandhill’, Hampstead Norreys Road, Hermitage, RG18 9XU
  3. Dismissed21 August 20253359935
    Kennet Centre, Newbury, RG14 5EN
  4. Allowed10 July 20253356688
    Land South of Sandhill, Hermitage, Thatcham, RG18 9XU
  5. Notice varied and upheld12 February 20253350386
    Lake House, West Woodhay, Newbury, RG20 0BU

The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.